STRATEGIC OUTRAGE: DOES THE US. MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM IN ROMANIA THREATEN RUSSIA?

Abstract

(By Boris Sokolov. Slon.ru, May 13, 2016. https://slon.ru/posts/68005 . Condensed text:) On May 12, the US Aegis Ashore missile defense system at the military base in Deveselu, Romania, was placed under NATO control. It comprises not only missile interceptors, but also a powerful missile defense radar station. Does this pose a threat to Russia? ... Moscow claims that it does, because it could eventually neutralize Russia’s nuclear missile shield, and describes the decision to deploy missile defense elements as harmful and misguided. Brussels, however, insists that the US missile defense elements deployed in Romania and those due to be deployed in Poland are aimed solely against the missile threat from Iran, and do not affect Russia’s nuclear missile capability in any way. So who is right? ... It’s no secret that Russian intercontinental nuclear missiles aimed at the US, as well as the analogous US missiles aimed at Russia, are supposed to be launched across the Arctic Ocean and the North Pole. This has been a well-known fact ever since Soviet days. ... There is no question that missiles in Romania and Poland will be incapable of intercepting Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles even if deployed in the Arctic Ocean, because interceptor missiles have a significantly lower speed. They can only shoot down Iranian missiles, which are rather primitive and not very numerous. If, however, Russian missiles fly toward Europe, Romanian and Polish complexes would only be capable of intercepting a few of them, which would not affect the power of the strike in any way.. . . ... The complex already stationed in Romania and the future complex in Poland are capable of intercepting [a total of] four missiles at best - which, naturally, in no way undermines Russia’s capability to deliver a massive thermonuclear strike. Russia has 521 strategic delivery systems with 1,735 warheads. Assuming that each Aegis system can destroy two warheads, it would take about 900 systems to neutralize our entire potential, requiring at least $800 billion to manufacture. This is to say nothing of the fact that a considerable part of Russia’s nuclear missile capability is comprised of ICBMs with a range of more than 5,500 kilometers. The Aegis is absolutely powerless against them.. . . ... So why is Russia so concerned about the deployment of the US missile defense system in Eastern Europe? Officially, Russia’s objections to the missile defense system are based on [the premise] that the US missile defense system would be modernized and eventually would be able to launch strikes from East European bases and warships to destroy Russia’s entire nuclear missile potential (if it were used to deliver a massive nuclear strike). ... However, such modernization would require several decades at best, and the very possibility of such modernization is rather dubious. In any event, it cannot be carried out on Aegis systems, which were developed back in the 1970s and have been in service since 1983. The chances of their modernization are close to zero. ... I believe that in reality, the main reason for Russia’s objection to the US missile defense system in Eastern Europe is purely political, not military-strategic. The fact is that even if it no longer considers them within its sphere of influence, Moscow still regards the former socialist countries of Eastern Europe and the Baltic region at the very least as territories where Russian interests (as the Kremlin understands them) should be taken into consideration no matter what. And the presence of US military bases and US military personnel, albeit rather small, undoubtedly makes it more difficult for Russia to exert military-political pressure on East European countries. After all, this sharply increases the probability of the US and other NATO countries becoming involved in such a conflict at an early stage under the pretext of protecting the lives of US military personnel.